A Faustian bargain
Haiti, Chile and the Limits of Giving
In the wake of devastation caused by last month’s horrific earthquake in Haiti, Americans provided a striking level of support. The Red Cross raised more than $40 million through text message donations alone. The relief effort seemed to emphasize Peter Singer’s famous argument that distance should have little impact on moral obligation. We didn’t owe Haitians any less just because they were far away. Despite the tough economy, Americans everywhere gave to the cause and most supported the U.S. government’s extensive work to help rebuild the nation.
Now, just a matter of weeks later, an 8.8 magnitude quake has rocked the South American nation of Chile. The death toll is over 700, millions are believed to be displaced, and one estimate puts damage at between 10 and 20 percent of the nation’s GDP.
With so much work left to be done in Haiti, what do Americans (and people around the world) now owe Chileans? Are those who gave to Haiti “off the hook” with regard to Chile, or must they again dip into their pockets?
The coincidence of two epic disasters is surely unfortunate, but we often cannot chose the circumstances we face. While Haiti mostly raised the question of whether we owed anything to people in other nations at all, the Chile quake raises new questions of how we prioritize between disasters.
One approach would be to say, first, that our obligations lie with the most morally urgent cases. Now that some of the immediate work has been done in Haiti to help those trapped under buildings or starving in the streets, it may be the time to turn our attention to Chile, which is only just grappling with the damage.
Another, complementary approach, would say that those who gave what they could to Haiti cannot be reasonably expect to contribute to Chile. Instead, the obligation now falls to those who, though able to give, “sat out” Haiti.
A third approach might attempt to delineate reasons that one nation or another would incur greater obligations. Haiti has a history of U.S. involvement, and also continues to require significant investment due to longstanding development challenges. Chile less so.
These are hard questions. It is unlikely that there’s another $41 million lying around in American wallets. Who will help Chile?
-Sam
Related posts:
- Managing risk
- Do unto others
- Should unemployment benefits be permanent?
- Arrrrrr….pirates and principles
- Friends can be statesmen, but can statesmen be friends?
ShareComments
One Response to “A Faustian bargain”
Leave a Reply
great question. perhaps haiti still should be a priority, since it remains the most needy of the two? even though chile is still trying to sort out its rescue systems and many search parties haven’t reached the country, haiti still remains a much needier country with less resources to help itself. while i’m not saying that we should not help chile at all, i do believe that haiti lacks domestic institutions and infrastructure and needs much more outside help than chile.